Through the misrepresentation and outright dismissal of certain opinions of a minority, Nick Timiraos contributes to the very “intellectual vacuum” which he claims to denounce (“Georgetown’s Intellectual Vacuum,” THE HOYA, Sept. 23, 2005, A3). Such ideologues are destroying the university by depicting their opponents as “too timid, too disorganized or too stupid” without actually confronting their opponents’ philosophical challenges. A minority at Georgetown, who often derive their thoughts from the philosophy of John Henry Cardinal Newman, make the well-founded argument that Georgetown should uphold its Catholic identity.
In any university, a professor has an obligation to teach about an opinion (whether he holds that opinion or not) as authentically as possible to his students. A university with an identity means that it takes a special effort to educate its students about that identity and will not financially endorse positions contrary to that identity.
A Catholic university is not a contradiction in terms. Georgetown will not force anyone to become Catholic. Georgetown allows different opinions to be expressed in its classrooms. Georgetown, however, reserves the right not to dismiss its own identity in order to allow others to be a part of the university. In this regard, Georgetown separates belief and conduct. Georgetown students and faculty can believe what they wish but Georgetown will not pay for conduct which expresses beliefs that are contrary to Georgetown’s identity.
As a university, Georgetown allows opposing viewpoints, but as a Catholic one, it will not financially endorse them. Georgetown should refuse pay to for something that destroys what it means to be Georgetown. If Georgetown endorses a position contrary to its identity, Georgetown would actually be destroying itself. Students, faculty, administrators, staff and alumni all have an interest in preserving Georgetown. Burning books, firing qualified professors and refusing to admit qualified students would destroy Georgetown’s identity as a university. Paying for contraception and abortions would destroy Georgetown’s identity as Catholic.
Professors should not be fired merely because they endorse positions contrary to Catholicism. This assertion is ridiculous because it would destroy the very essence of what it means to be a university. A university benefits from the flow of opposing theories, because one theory can be strengthened by rebuttal of opposing theories. A university should not have a litmus test for professors. It should, however, seek to hire professors who have a wide scope of knowledge about the differing opinions on a topic. It should not seek only those professors who believe what the majority of students do. It should not seek only popular speakers whose lectures draw the most students.
Georgetown can, however, fire professors who do not fulfill their obligations as professors. Professors should not manipulatively present Catholicism as something it is not or purposefully present only opposition to the Catholic perspective. At a Catholic university, professors should adequately introduce students to the Catholic perspective on an issue. isrepresentations of the Catholic perspective chip away at both Georgetown’s Catholic identity and its role as a university. Professors who purposefully misrepresent the Catholic perspective are simply inadequate professors. A professor is being dishonest with his students when he keeps knowledge from them merely because it is damaging to his own opinion. A professor who indoctrinates his students (even if his opinions are perfectly in line with the Catholic identity) is not a very good professor. A good professor encourages students to extensively research theories and to think critically about them. The recognition that there are different opinions on an issue and the ability to represent those different opinions accurately are some of the most important skills obtained at a university.
Simply because discussion at Georgetown about Catholic identity seems to revolve around abortion, contraception, homosexuality and social justice, many have the erroneous notion that this is all that the Catholic identity entails. What it means to be Catholic is often disputed at Georgetown, but the Catholic Church offers a very clear delineation of what the Catholic identity is in the catechism, extensive coverage of Catholic beliefs and practices.
Whether Georgetown’s policies are fair or consistent and what identity is the correct or best identity for Georgetown are additional issues that often arise in this debate. A lot more ink must be spent to tackle these particular questions, but the argument that Georgetown should uphold its identity as a Catholic university is, nevertheless, based in a well-founded philosophy.
Maya Noronha is a 2005 graduate of the College, a first-year student at the Georgetown University Law Center, and a former contributing editor of THE HOYA.
